Militarized Rhetoric in the 2024 Indonesian Presidential Election Debate: Threats to Democratic Deliberation

Abstract

Abstract This study employs Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework to examine how the three main candidates in the 2024 Indonesian presidential election – Anies Baswedan, Prabowo Subianto, and Ganjar Pranowo – strategically militarized language to construct politics as a battlefield. Through an analysis of the third presidential debate, this study reveals the pervasive use of war-related vocabulary, active verbs, confrontational metaphors, and other discursive strategies that positioned the candidates as commanders leading the charge against the nation’s enemies. Situating this martial language within Indonesia’s broader socio-political context, this study argues that such militarized campaign rhetoric both emerged from and reinforced a political culture still grappling with the legacy of authoritarianism. Tapping into deep-seated anxieties about instability and foreign threats, this discursive militarization has reduced complex policy issues to simplistic ‘us vs. them’ dichotomies and narrowed the space for deliberation and dissent. The normalization of war-like discourse poses a serious threat to Indonesia’s democratic development. To build a more resilient democracy, Indonesia’s leaders must reject martial posturing and cultivate a new language of politics centered on dialogue, pluralism, and peaceful change.

Keywords

• critical discourse analysis
• indonesian politics
• metaphor analysis
• militarization of language
• political discourse